Re: [tlug] Better to have "bottom-posted"?

[steve smith <sjs@example.com>]

Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> ...
> Thing is, as a style "top-posting" really is the combination of the
> two: inserting new text at the top *and* not trimming.  Most people on
> this list are aware that both are bad, and that of the two, trimming
> is actually more valuable to the readers (as well as more costly to
> the poster!)  But it's been called "top-posting" because that's the
> more visible characteristic, I guess.
>
>   
One big difference between this group and others I belong to is that 
members on this group know about threads and threaded email readers.  
With top posting the entire text is carried in each email but the thread 
tends to be lost.  In bottom posting only the context you are replying 
to is in the email and you can see the logic of the whole thread with 
your email reader.

Most of my friends use top posting  and don't understand threads or 
threaded email.  And most of those threads are only 3 or 4 messages 
long.  Very few messages on this list are that short.

Personally I prefer bottom posting with trimming and use it for all my 
email but I don't think the bottom posters even notice the difference.

Steve S.